Evidence A1: Cashier's check made payable to Berkshire Hathaway, explicitly labeled for 26 of 37 payments to Phat Tran. Delivered to agreed address. Marked NON-NEGOTIABLE with full banking trace data.
Overview: This section outlines the use of deceptive financial demands and violation of lawful banking protocols to perpetrate a scheme against the tenant. The demand to transfer rent funds into a private account, despite issuance of a negotiated cashier's check, triggered state and federal violations—including FDCPA violations, debt collection misconduct, and 18 U.S.C. §1343 wire fraud violations.
Evidence A1: Cashier's check made payable to Berkshire Hathaway, explicitly labeled for 26 of 37 payments to Phat Tran. Delivered to agreed address. Marked NON-NEGOTIABLE with full banking trace data.
Evidence A2: Text from Phat Tran stating he cannot answer any questions and accuses tenant of counterfeiting the second lease—confirming avoidance of contractual obligation and banking traceability.
Evidence A3: Bank rules for replacement of checks over $1,000. Check reissuance requires either bond purchase or 30–90 day delay. Owner's refusal to acknowledge the bank process confirms bad faith.
Requires all debt collection in California to comply with federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Violations include coercion, false representation, and denial of payment received. Violators are subject to statutory penalties and attorney's fees.
A scheme to defraud using email, phone, or electronic transmission to secure unlawful payment. The demand to redirect rent into a private account without honoring the official cashier's check constitutes electronic fraud.
Applies to deceptive, misleading, and unfair business practices. Misrepresentation of payment obligation, hiding check acceptance status, and threatening eviction under false pretenses all qualify under BPC §17200.
Conclusion: The refusal to honor a properly issued cashier's check, paired with demands to divert funds into a private account under threat of eviction, meets the legal definition of wire fraud, debt collection violation, and unlawful business conduct. Documentation of bank rules and digital messages confirms intentional circumvention of contract, procedure, and consumer protection law.